Democrats: The Modern 'Know-Nothing' Party

[Toro]

^^^
Interesting. The media pimps Clinton's surplus all the time too. But to be fair, so does Newt Gingrich. That guy is such a __________.

Gingrich and the GOP Congress gets as much credit balancing the budget as Clinton does.

 

[PoliticalChic]

I have found in my life people who do not want to learn
I have found those that are in capable of learning.
You fit into the second category and do not not have the capacity for clear unencumbered thought. You are so steeped in the hive mind learning agenda you are blind to facts. I'm done you have worn me out. I will not try and continue to enlighten you. I am afraid the bulb in your head has gone out completely with no hope of revival.
In fact you are so sad I pity you. I feel sorry for those who have to contend with your learning disability and inability to even grasps small details on a daily basis.
At first I thought it was just some arrogant ruse.
Now I realize you must have a disability and I am sorry for any more harm I might have caused to your fragile condition.
You be careful in life and I do wish you and those who care for you all the best.

1. "I have found those that are in capable of learning."
Incapable is one word.

2. "...you are blind to facts."
Right back atcha...

3. "I will not try and continue to enlighten you."
Based on the source of the wisdom, ...wise choice.

4. My turn?
There are the folks who know, and the folks who don’t know, but you belong to the third group: the ones who don’t know, and don’t know they don’t know.



Here are the two things you must remember: never write a post as dumb as this again, and Never, under any circumstances, take a sleeping pill and a laxative on
the same night.


I gotta go now....I have my recital tonight. Wish me luck!

I am very serious. This will be the last post of yours I will respond to. I do feel sorry for you and hope that with care someday you might gain the faculty of understanding. I do hope someone is reading these posts to you so you don't have to struggle so hard. Take care of yourself. To those that have been helping you I say best wishes. It must be a real difficult struggle for you folks. Take care of her and please don't let her get to stressed you never can tell what she might do.

So....this is the most gracious way you have of admitting that you were wrong???

C'mon...you do better: Try this...
1. Ask for some slack as a new member of our community...

2. Admit that Clinton never had a surplus, and you've been fooled....but won't let it happen again.

3. Try this: say 'please forgive me, I'll be good,' and then clutch the hems of my grarment...even use it to wipe away your tears!

4. Or...the Liberal mode, pretend that you were right, and I have some sort of condition that prevents me from realizing the rectitude of the Left, and - although you've tried, teaching me is beyond the labors of Sisyphus!

(and we should ignore that your hero is a rapist....)

Oh...you already tried #4?

OK...then try this: Go back to your first job, making fax and modem noises.



Doncha wanna ask how my recital went last night?
I played the 1st Arabesque. By Claude Debussy...
Love it?
Me too.

Ta ta.

 

[Full-Auto]

1. In "Applied Economics: Thinking Beyond Stage One," Dr. Thomas Sowell points out that many politicians do not think beyond Stage One because they will be praised (and elected) for the short term benefits but will not be held accountable much later when the long term consequences appear.


The truth can be clearly seen in the economic policy that will be voted on in November.

2. The NYTimes verifies that the Obama economic plan is less beneficial than the Ryan Plan:

a. Deficit in 2016
Obama: $529 billion
Ryan Plan $241 billion

b. Added debt over the next ten years:
Obama $6.4 trillion
Ryan $3.1 trillion

c. Balances the budget:
Obama: never
Ryan: by 2040
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/21/us/politics/house-republicans-release-budget-blueprint.html


Not even close!
To vote for the Obama economic plan, one would have to subscribe to 'I know nothing...I vote Democrat.'


Obama: When you find yourself in a hole.....stop digging.

You forgot the part about what Obama inherited. Did you do that on purpose?

Obama inherited a trillion dollar deficit. But what is he doing to fix it?

I understand the term inherited, but when you leave that for yourself, was one of the team. How should that be labeled?

 

[PoliticalChic]

The day a CON$erviNutzi uses honest and accurate data, facts logic or experience is the day the Earth will end!

If the deficit in 2008 was only 459 billion, how did the national debt increase 1 trillion in 2008??? And if the deficit in 2007 was only 161 billion, how did the national debt increase 500 billion in 2007???

Government - Historical Debt Outstanding - Annual 2000 - 2010
09/30/2008 - $10,024,724,896,912.49
09/30/2007 - $9,007,653,372,262.48
09/30/2006 - $8,506,973,899,215.23

I always appreciate it when the lesser members of our community, i.e., the Liberals, apply for instruction....


1. It should be enlightening, here, to explore accounting procedures…one of which is known as the Unified Cash Basis Budgeting. Just as with any one of us who writes a check, it is recorded as an expense, and when we receive a check, it is listed as income. Generally, government treats budgets in the same way. U.S. GAO - Search :: "Cash basis accounting"

a. So, a deficit means that the government spent more than it received during a specific fiscal year.

b. Now, think about this: using the cash basis method, you plan for a vacation in January by taking a $2,000 loan in December. This will appear as an asset in your bookkeeping- even though you will be obligated to repay this loan: it is actually a liability! This is exactly the situation that allowed Clinton to raid the Social Security Trust Fund, and claim this as revenue, even though it is an obligation to pay in the future. Beck, Balke, “Broke,” p. 172.

c. Now, watch the sleight-of-hand: using the money received now as revenue, even though it is supposed to be for paying future benefits! http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d05958sp.pdf
It is the Social Security surplus that helps offset the huge deficits!

d. So, by this method we can pencil it in when cash is paid: it gives a picture of finances at a given moment…but fails to account for resources used but not yet paid for. Retirement costs of employees? No! This is the method used by the CBO for budgeting purposes. The federal budget: politics, policy, process - Allen Schick, Felix LoStracco - Google Books
e. This is the preferred method to use if you wish to convince folks that things aren’t as bad as they really are.

2. The Modified Accrual Basis Budget is more accurate, in that it measures income and expenses when they are actually earned or incurred, when the transaction is actually agreed to: buy two steaks, and pay on the spot. This method gives a longer-term view of all obligations, as well as resources used that year. But…it doesn’t show how much has to be borrowed for that year’s activities.

a. This method takes into consideration the cost of retirement benefits of federal employees; the method is generally used by private-sector corporations and businesses, as well as the federal government, for reporting- but not for budgeting.

b. This method does not include expected tax revenues, since it is difficult to estimate same…so it is not accounted for until it is officially collected.

3. The federal government uses both methods, as well as several other financial statements. But even this totality makes it difficult to account for long term commitments that include Social Security and Medicare. (Thus, some of those other statements). No. 282: Federal Government 2009 GAAP-Accounting

The old saying that you so aptly demonstrate: “He knew his way out of the harbor, but after that, everything was open sea.”

How about we simply agree that 'Clinton's your daddy' and then no one will expect any honesty from you about his record?
OK?

Or ...that you are simply a Leftwing automaton...and none will require you to think?
That better?

Or...
That you are simply clueless.

'Cmon...A, B, or C? Which is it?

"Clinton ran deficits throught all 8 years of his term, and one can go to the US Treasury Department and looking through the history of the total outstanding debt through Clintons term.

Every year Clinton was in office, the total national debt continued to climb.

How Clinton managed to claim a surplus was that while the general operating budgets ran deficits but Clinton borrowed from numerous off budget funds to make the on budget fund a surplus.

For example, in 2000, Clinton claimed a $230B surplus, but Clinton borrowed
$152.3B from Social Security
$30.9B from Civil Service Retirement Fund
$18.5B from Federal Supplementary Medical insurance Trust Fund
$15.0B from Federal Hospital Insurance Trust Fund
$9.0B from the Federal Unemployment Trust Fund
$8.2B from Military Retirement Fund
$3.8B from Transportation Trust Funds
$1.8B from Employee Life Insurance & Retirement fund
$7.0B from others

Total borrowed from off budget funds $246.5B, meaning that his $230B surplus is actually a $16.5B deficit.
($246.5B borrowed - $230B claimed surplus = $16.5B actual deficit).

If there is ever a true surplus, then the national debt will go down.

the national debt did not go down one year during the Clinton administration.
How much surplus did the US have when Clinton left office


So much for your post. All I can say is that at least the ‘Rainman’ was good at math.


Now that I've provided actual numbers....who swallows droppings?
Open wide....

I've lost track of all the times I've shown CON$erviNutzis on both sides of every issue depending on the direction the wind blows at the moment. But since CON$ do nothing but parrot platitudes they don't understand, they are too stupid to be aware of their putting their foot firmly in their condescending mouth

When I pointed out that Bush's 2008 $459 billion deficit was actually over a trillion dollars, Pompous Cheek made the case that the "Unified Cash Basis Budgeting" allowed Bush to borrow "from numerous off budget funds" like the SS Surplus to make Bush's on budget deficit smaller, but she made the exact opposite case when the exact same bookkeeping gave Clinton a surplus. Suddenly "Unified Cash Basis Budgeting" produced an "imaginary" Clinton surplus.

Obviously Bush's "real" $459 billion 2008 deficit is as "imaginary" as Clinton's $230 billion 2000 surplus and vice versa, but no CON$erviNutzi is honest enough to admit it. To CON$, what Clinton borrowed from SS is part of that year's budget deficit, but what Bush borrowed from SS is not.

"...as "imaginary" as Clinton's $230 billion 2000 surplus..."

OMG!!!

…you are correct!

That’s an event that usually accompanies a parting sea or a stone tablet!!!


Beets...I love that 'Pompous Cheek'...would you mind if I have that embroidered on my towels?

 

[PoliticalChic]

1. In "Applied Economics: Thinking Beyond Stage One," Dr. Thomas Sowell points out that many politicians do not think beyond Stage One because they will be praised (and elected) for the short term benefits but will not be held accountable much later when the long term consequences appear.


The truth can be clearly seen in the economic policy that will be voted on in November.

2. The NYTimes verifies that the Obama economic plan is less beneficial than the Ryan Plan:

a. Deficit in 2016
Obama: $529 billion
Ryan Plan $241 billion

b. Added debt over the next ten years:
Obama $6.4 trillion
Ryan $3.1 trillion

c. Balances the budget:
Obama: never
Ryan: by 2040
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/21/us/politics/house-republicans-release-budget-blueprint.html


Not even close!
To vote for the Obama economic plan, one would have to subscribe to 'I know nothing...I vote Democrat.'


Obama: When you find yourself in a hole.....stop digging.

I think everyone understands the numbers. The question is how many retirees would be uninsured under Ryan's plan, because there are tens of millions who will not be able to afford the premiums required. We know costs are going up, but are we going to find a way to pay for them or are we just going to throw our retirees, which will be most of us, to the wolves? And if we go with a Ryan type plan, what will be the long term consequences to those tens of millions of retirees who find themselves uninsured in their retirement?

audi...we've been kicking this around for years....and I understand your position.
But...socialism is not the way to solve the prob...
free market is.

First step: no mandates, state or federal.

 

[rightwinger]

1. "I have found those that are in capable of learning."
Incapable is one word.

2. "...you are blind to facts."
Right back atcha...

3. "I will not try and continue to enlighten you."
Based on the source of the wisdom, ...wise choice.

4. My turn?
There are the folks who know, and the folks who don’t know, but you belong to the third group: the ones who don’t know, and don’t know they don’t know.



Here are the two things you must remember: never write a post as dumb as this again, and Never, under any circumstances, take a sleeping pill and a laxative on
the same night.


I gotta go now....I have my recital tonight. Wish me luck!

I am very serious. This will be the last post of yours I will respond to. I do feel sorry for you and hope that with care someday you might gain the faculty of understanding. I do hope someone is reading these posts to you so you don't have to struggle so hard. Take care of yourself. To those that have been helping you I say best wishes. It must be a real difficult struggle for you folks. Take care of her and please don't let her get to stressed you never can tell what she might do.

So....this is the most gracious way you have of admitting that you were wrong???

C'mon...you do better: Try this...
1. Ask for some slack as a new member of our community...

2. Admit that Clinton never had a surplus, and you've been fooled....but won't let it happen again.

3. Try this: say 'please forgive me, I'll be good,' and then clutch the hems of my grarment...even use it to wipe away your tears!

4. Or...the Liberal mode, pretend that you were right, and I have some sort of condition that prevents me from realizing the rectitude of the Left, and - although you've tried, teaching me is beyond the labors of Sisyphus!

(and we should ignore that your hero is a rapist....)

Oh...you already tried #4?

OK...then try this: Go back to your first job, making fax and modem noises.



Doncha wanna ask how my recital went last night?
I played the 1st Arabesque. By Claude Debussy...
Love it?
Me too.

Ta ta.

No greater expert than George Bush himself admitted that Clinton left him a huge surplus

Are you claiming that the Republicans were. "know nothings" too?

 

[PoliticalChic]

I am very serious. This will be the last post of yours I will respond to. I do feel sorry for you and hope that with care someday you might gain the faculty of understanding. I do hope someone is reading these posts to you so you don't have to struggle so hard. Take care of yourself. To those that have been helping you I say best wishes. It must be a real difficult struggle for you folks. Take care of her and please don't let her get to stressed you never can tell what she might do.

So....this is the most gracious way you have of admitting that you were wrong???

C'mon...you do better: Try this...
1. Ask for some slack as a new member of our community...

2. Admit that Clinton never had a surplus, and you've been fooled....but won't let it happen again.

3. Try this: say 'please forgive me, I'll be good,' and then clutch the hems of my grarment...even use it to wipe away your tears!

4. Or...the Liberal mode, pretend that you were right, and I have some sort of condition that prevents me from realizing the rectitude of the Left, and - although you've tried, teaching me is beyond the labors of Sisyphus!

(and we should ignore that your hero is a rapist....)

Oh...you already tried #4?

OK...then try this: Go back to your first job, making fax and modem noises.



Doncha wanna ask how my recital went last night?
I played the 1st Arabesque. By Claude Debussy...
Love it?
Me too.

Ta ta.

No greater expert than George Bush himself admitted that Clinton left him a huge surplus

Are you claiming that the Republicans were. "know nothings" too?

No greater expert than the very PoliticalChic is going to disabuse you of your error:

Now watch this:


Would you like to see the actual national debt figures?
1993 4,351,044
1994 4,643,307
1995 4,920,586
1996 5,181,465
1997 5,369,206
1998 5,478,189
1999 5,605,523
2000 5,628,700

Historical Tables | The White House (table 7.1)

The table 7.1 will also show that he inherited a $4 trillion debt.

Government - Historical Debt Outstanding - Annual 1950 - 1999

That means the debt increased 41% under Clinton.
And no wars or military build up to blame it on!


No matter who says it....the figures are real. Check 'em.

Debt increased. No surplus.

But, not facts, nor data, nor experience, nor rational debate will convince individuals such as you....

Explaining to a Liberal is like trying to tell a devout Muslim that Al-Buraq didn't carry the prophet Muhammad from Mecca to Jerusalem and back during the Isra and Mi'raj or "Night Journey."


Clinton's surplus is your Al-Buraq.
It is your religious devotion.
Carry on.

 

[rightwinger]

So....this is the most gracious way you have of admitting that you were wrong???

C'mon...you do better: Try this...
1. Ask for some slack as a new member of our community...

2. Admit that Clinton never had a surplus, and you've been fooled....but won't let it happen again.

3. Try this: say 'please forgive me, I'll be good,' and then clutch the hems of my grarment...even use it to wipe away your tears!

4. Or...the Liberal mode, pretend that you were right, and I have some sort of condition that prevents me from realizing the rectitude of the Left, and - although you've tried, teaching me is beyond the labors of Sisyphus!

(and we should ignore that your hero is a rapist....)

Oh...you already tried #4?

OK...then try this: Go back to your first job, making fax and modem noises.



Doncha wanna ask how my recital went last night?
I played the 1st Arabesque. By Claude Debussy...
Love it?
Me too.

Ta ta.

No greater expert than George Bush himself admitted that Clinton left him a huge surplus

Are you claiming that the Republicans were. "know nothings" too?

No greater expert than the very PoliticalChic is going to disabuse you of your error:

Now watch this:


Would you like to see the actual national debt figures?
1993 4,351,044
1994 4,643,307
1995 4,920,586
1996 5,181,465
1997 5,369,206
1998 5,478,189
1999 5,605,523
2000 5,628,700

Historical Tables | The White House (table 7.1)

The table 7.1 will also show that he inherited a $4 trillion debt.

Government - Historical Debt Outstanding - Annual 1950 - 1999

That means the debt increased 41% under Clinton.
And no wars or military build up to blame it on!


No matter who says it....the figures are real. Check 'em.

Debt increased. No surplus.

But, not facts, nor data, nor experience, nor rational debate will convince individuals such as you....

Explaining to a Liberal is like trying to tell a devout Muslim that Al-Buraq didn't carry the prophet Muhammad from Mecca to Jerusalem and back during the Isra and Mi'raj or "Night Journey."


Clinton's surplus is your Al-Buraq.
It is your religious devotion.
Carry on.

So which is it?

Did Bush lie or was he a know-nothing when he used the Clinton surplus to justify his tax cut?

Looks like Republicans use one accounting method when they want to cut taxes and another when they want to discredit the Clinton administration

 

[PoliticalChic]

Rightwinger serves as exhibit A in proof that being a Liberal is a matter of religion, and therefore, not susceptible to actual thinking even in the face of undeniable evidence.

 

[L.K.Eder]

So....this is the most gracious way you have of admitting that you were wrong???

C'mon...you do better: Try this...
1. Ask for some slack as a new member of our community...

2. Admit that Clinton never had a surplus, and you've been fooled....but won't let it happen again.

3. Try this: say 'please forgive me, I'll be good,' and then clutch the hems of my grarment...even use it to wipe away your tears!

4. Or...the Liberal mode, pretend that you were right, and I have some sort of condition that prevents me from realizing the rectitude of the Left, and - although you've tried, teaching me is beyond the labors of Sisyphus!

(and we should ignore that your hero is a rapist....)

Oh...you already tried #4?

OK...then try this: Go back to your first job, making fax and modem noises.



Doncha wanna ask how my recital went last night?
I played the 1st Arabesque. By Claude Debussy...
Love it?
Me too.

Ta ta.

No greater expert than George Bush himself admitted that Clinton left him a huge surplus

Are you claiming that the Republicans were. "know nothings" too?

No greater expert than the very PoliticalChic is going to disabuse you of your error:

Now watch this:


Would you like to see the actual national debt figures?
1993 4,351,044
1994 4,643,307
1995 4,920,586
1996 5,181,465
1997 5,369,206
1998 5,478,189
1999 5,605,523
2000 5,628,700

Historical Tables | The White House (table 7.1)

The table 7.1 will also show that he inherited a $4 trillion debt.

Government - Historical Debt Outstanding - Annual 1950 - 1999

That means the debt increased 41% under Clinton.
And no wars or military build up to blame it on!


No matter who says it....the figures are real. Check 'em.

Debt increased. No surplus.

But, not facts, nor data, nor experience, nor rational debate will convince individuals such as you....

Explaining to a Liberal is like trying to tell a devout Muslim that Al-Buraq didn't carry the prophet Muhammad from Mecca to Jerusalem and back during the Isra and Mi'raj or "Night Journey."


Clinton's surplus is your Al-Buraq.
It is your religious devotion.
Carry on.

budget surplus..


not "eliminating debt from previous budget deficits".

 

[PoliticalChic]

No greater expert than George Bush himself admitted that Clinton left him a huge surplus

Are you claiming that the Republicans were. "know nothings" too?

No greater expert than the very PoliticalChic is going to disabuse you of your error:

Now watch this:


Would you like to see the actual national debt figures?
1993 4,351,044
1994 4,643,307
1995 4,920,586
1996 5,181,465
1997 5,369,206
1998 5,478,189
1999 5,605,523
2000 5,628,700

Historical Tables | The White House (table 7.1)

The table 7.1 will also show that he inherited a $4 trillion debt.

Government - Historical Debt Outstanding - Annual 1950 - 1999

That means the debt increased 41% under Clinton.
And no wars or military build up to blame it on!


No matter who says it....the figures are real. Check 'em.

Debt increased. No surplus.

But, not facts, nor data, nor experience, nor rational debate will convince individuals such as you....

Explaining to a Liberal is like trying to tell a devout Muslim that Al-Buraq didn't carry the prophet Muhammad from Mecca to Jerusalem and back during the Isra and Mi'raj or "Night Journey."


Clinton's surplus is your Al-Buraq.
It is your religious devotion.
Carry on.

So which is it?

Did Bush lie or was he a know-nothing when he used the Clinton surplus to justify his tax cut?

Looks like Republicans use one accounting method when they want to cut taxes and another when they want to discredit the Clinton administration

1. As conservative, i.e., I behave with civility, I try not to toss around the term 'lie.'

2. If you change that indictment to 'was incorrect in his usage' and provide a link, I might subscribe to same.

3. Now, look at you stamp your little feet, and squench your eyes closed so you can ignore the data on national debt.

4. If only you had the gift of irony, you'd be as amused as I when anyone uses the phrase " want to discredit the Clinton administration..."

How can anyone 'discredit' a rapist moreso than the rapist himself???


And, you don't realize what a brain-dead automaton you are becoming. Get a grip, wingy.

 

[PoliticalChic]

No greater expert than George Bush himself admitted that Clinton left him a huge surplus

Are you claiming that the Republicans were. "know nothings" too?

No greater expert than the very PoliticalChic is going to disabuse you of your error:

Now watch this:


Would you like to see the actual national debt figures?
1993 4,351,044
1994 4,643,307
1995 4,920,586
1996 5,181,465
1997 5,369,206
1998 5,478,189
1999 5,605,523
2000 5,628,700

Historical Tables | The White House (table 7.1)

The table 7.1 will also show that he inherited a $4 trillion debt.

Government - Historical Debt Outstanding - Annual 1950 - 1999

That means the debt increased 41% under Clinton.
And no wars or military build up to blame it on!


No matter who says it....the figures are real. Check 'em.

Debt increased. No surplus.

But, not facts, nor data, nor experience, nor rational debate will convince individuals such as you....

Explaining to a Liberal is like trying to tell a devout Muslim that Al-Buraq didn't carry the prophet Muhammad from Mecca to Jerusalem and back during the Isra and Mi'raj or "Night Journey."


Clinton's surplus is your Al-Buraq.
It is your religious devotion.
Carry on.

budget surplus..


not "eliminating debt from previous budget deficits".

Do you know what surplus means?

It doesn't mean deciding not to pay debts, and squirreling the money away....
....or spending it elsewhere.

The word 'surplus' is a term of art applied to Democrat-progressive-liberal- Leftists so that the gullible will be impressed.

Are you impressed?



Now.....please.....get rid of that ugly bird!!!!

 

[L.K.Eder]

debt can increase even with a budget surplus. that depends on what you do with the surplus.

debt is not the same as deficit.

 

[L.K.Eder]

No greater expert than the very PoliticalChic is going to disabuse you of your error:

Now watch this:


Would you like to see the actual national debt figures?
1993 4,351,044
1994 4,643,307
1995 4,920,586
1996 5,181,465
1997 5,369,206
1998 5,478,189
1999 5,605,523
2000 5,628,700

Historical Tables | The White House (table 7.1)

The table 7.1 will also show that he inherited a $4 trillion debt.

Government - Historical Debt Outstanding - Annual 1950 - 1999

That means the debt increased 41% under Clinton.
And no wars or military build up to blame it on!


No matter who says it....the figures are real. Check 'em.

Debt increased. No surplus.

But, not facts, nor data, nor experience, nor rational debate will convince individuals such as you....

Explaining to a Liberal is like trying to tell a devout Muslim that Al-Buraq didn't carry the prophet Muhammad from Mecca to Jerusalem and back during the Isra and Mi'raj or "Night Journey."


Clinton's surplus is your Al-Buraq.
It is your religious devotion.
Carry on.

budget surplus..


not "eliminating debt from previous budget deficits".

Do you know what surplus means?

It doesn't mean deciding not to pay debts, and squirreling the money away....
....or spending it elsewhere.

The word 'surplus' is a term of art applied to Democrat-progressive-liberal- Leftists so that the gullible will be impressed.

Are you impressed?



Now.....please.....get rid of that ugly bird!!!!

i know what a surplus is, i also know what a budget is.

i know that your line:

"debt increased.no surplus"

shows that you seem to be the one having trouble with those concepts.

the bird stays, for now.

maybe i change it if you behave,

 

[PoliticalChic]

debt can increase even with a budget surplus. that depends on what you do with the surplus.

debt is not the same as deficit.

Let's agree that the debate is founded in common English usage.

sur·plus/ˈsərpləs/
Noun:
An amount of something left over when requirements have been met; an excess of production or supply over demand.
Adjective:
More than what is needed or used; excess.
Synonyms:
noun. excess - overplus - overage - superfluity - redundance
adjective. redundant - superfluous - spare - excessive


NO UGLY BIRDS!


How about a nice little canary?
Cardinal?

 

[PoliticalChic]

budget surplus..


not "eliminating debt from previous budget deficits".

Do you know what surplus means?

It doesn't mean deciding not to pay debts, and squirreling the money away....
....or spending it elsewhere.

The word 'surplus' is a term of art applied to Democrat-progressive-liberal- Leftists so that the gullible will be impressed.

Are you impressed?



Now.....please.....get rid of that ugly bird!!!!

i know what a surplus is, i also know what a budget is.

i know that your line:

"debt increased.no surplus"

shows that you seem to be the one having trouble with those concepts.

the bird stays, for now.

maybe i change it if you behave,

I understand fully.
I simply do not agree to allow you to bend the meaning of the words to suit a Left wing agenda.


And....just what do you mean by 'behave'???

There are laws you know!

 

[rightwinger]

No greater expert than the very PoliticalChic is going to disabuse you of your error:

Now watch this:


Would you like to see the actual national debt figures?
1993 4,351,044
1994 4,643,307
1995 4,920,586
1996 5,181,465
1997 5,369,206
1998 5,478,189
1999 5,605,523
2000 5,628,700

Historical Tables | The White House (table 7.1)

The table 7.1 will also show that he inherited a $4 trillion debt.

Government - Historical Debt Outstanding - Annual 1950 - 1999

That means the debt increased 41% under Clinton.
And no wars or military build up to blame it on!


No matter who says it....the figures are real. Check 'em.

Debt increased. No surplus.

But, not facts, nor data, nor experience, nor rational debate will convince individuals such as you....

Explaining to a Liberal is like trying to tell a devout Muslim that Al-Buraq didn't carry the prophet Muhammad from Mecca to Jerusalem and back during the Isra and Mi'raj or "Night Journey."


Clinton's surplus is your Al-Buraq.
It is your religious devotion.
Carry on.

So which is it?

Did Bush lie or was he a know-nothing when he used the Clinton surplus to justify his tax cut?

Looks like Republicans use one accounting method when they want to cut taxes and another when they want to discredit the Clinton administration

1. As conservative, i.e., I behave with civility, I try not to toss around the term 'lie.'

2. If you change that indictment to 'was incorrect in his usage' and provide a link, I might subscribe to same.

3. Now, look at you stamp your little feet, and squench your eyes closed so you can ignore the data on national debt.

4. If only you had the gift of irony, you'd be as amused as I when anyone uses the phrase " want to discredit the Clinton administration..."

How can anyone 'discredit' a rapist moreso than the rapist himself???


And, you don't realize what a brain-dead automaton you are becoming. Get a grip, wingy.

George Bush stood in front of the American people and said it was not just for the Government to take in more money than it needs (surplus). He insisted on a tax cut to give that money back.

Now, by your own assertion, he was wrong, there was no surplus to justify his tax cut.

Now, there are two possibilities

He is a "know nothing" (your term) and got the budget numbers wrong
He knew there was no surplus and lied to get his tax cut

 

[PoliticalChic]

So which is it?

Did Bush lie or was he a know-nothing when he used the Clinton surplus to justify his tax cut?

Looks like Republicans use one accounting method when they want to cut taxes and another when they want to discredit the Clinton administration

1. As conservative, i.e., I behave with civility, I try not to toss around the term 'lie.'

2. If you change that indictment to 'was incorrect in his usage' and provide a link, I might subscribe to same.

3. Now, look at you stamp your little feet, and squench your eyes closed so you can ignore the data on national debt.

4. If only you had the gift of irony, you'd be as amused as I when anyone uses the phrase " want to discredit the Clinton administration..."

How can anyone 'discredit' a rapist moreso than the rapist himself???


And, you don't realize what a brain-dead automaton you are becoming. Get a grip, wingy.

George Bush stood in front of the American people and said it was not just for the Government to take in more money than it needs (surplus). He insisted on a tax cut to give that money back.

Now, by your own assertion, he was wrong, there was no surplus to justify his tax cut.

Now, there are two possibilities

He is a "know nothing" (your term) and got the budget numbers wrong
He knew there was no surplus and lied to get his tax cut

By changing he subject, I assume that means that you realize you've lost....

No Clinton surplus.

No?
Allahu Akbar.

 

[L.K.Eder]

debt can increase even with a budget surplus. that depends on what you do with the surplus.

debt is not the same as deficit.

Let's agree that the debate is founded in common English usage.

sur·plus/ˈsərpləs/
Noun:
An amount of something left over when requirements have been met; an excess of production or supply over demand.
Adjective:
More than what is needed or used; excess.
Synonyms:
noun. excess - overplus - overage - superfluity - redundance
adjective. redundant - superfluous - spare - excessive


NO UGLY BIRDS!


How about a nice little canary?
Cardinal?

a budget deficit. not an overall deficit. that would be debt.
a budget surplus. not an overall surplus. i have no idea if there is a word for that. governments operate on debt.

canaries and cardinals are nice birds. i will consider it.

 

[PoliticalChic]

debt can increase even with a budget surplus. that depends on what you do with the surplus.

debt is not the same as deficit.

Let's agree that the debate is founded in common English usage.

sur·plus/ˈsərpləs/
Noun:
An amount of something left over when requirements have been met; an excess of production or supply over demand.
Adjective:
More than what is needed or used; excess.
Synonyms:
noun. excess - overplus - overage - superfluity - redundance
adjective. redundant - superfluous - spare - excessive


NO UGLY BIRDS!


How about a nice little canary?
Cardinal?

a budget deficit. not an overall deficit. that would be debt.
a budget surplus. not an overall surplus. i have no idea if there is a word for that. governments operate on debt.

canaries and cardinals are nice birds. i will consider it.

"...governments operate on debt."

On Jan. 8, 1835, all the big political names in Washington gathered to celebrate what President Andrew Jackson had just accomplished. A senator rose to make the big announcement: "Gentlemen ... the national debt ... is PAID."
When The U.S. Paid Off The Entire National Debt (And Why It Didn't Last) : Planet Money : NPR



Guess I just blew chances for a canary, huh?